Talk:2005 GP2 Series

Oh, the article is very great!I did [GP2/Saison 2005] by this article. (Sorry, but i'm twelve years old and come from Germany so I can't speak English very good.)(Watch [[1]] to find more informations!)

Expansion/cleanup[edit]

This article needs some attention; it is crying out for a detailed season summary, and the results tables need some changes to standardise them. Adrian M. H. 23:22, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Calendar[edit]

Please do not delete the reports, pole positions and fastest laps, with time I will bring all season's articles in a single species. I want to do the same kind as the articles of the Formula One, World Touring Car Championship, Formula Three Euroseries. Cybervoron (talk) 06:18, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It should not be there. A calendar is for listing the dates, not for displaying the results. Results belong in the results section. It's very simple to grasp.

Also, I looked at Formula One and it does not list fastest laps or pole positions in the calendar section. It lists them in the results. I also note the 2009 GP2 calendar does not contain fastest lap or pole position either. And looking at the 2008 World Touring Car season, it's not there either. Don't do it. --Falcadore (talk) 06:25, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Again I ask, why the duplication of pole position and fastest lap? That information, which has nothing to do with the calendar, (and as above nothing to do with the Formula One table you've claimed above) is duplicated within the results table. Why does it appear in the calendar section it should be remvoed immediately. --Falcadore (talk) 03:59, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And I think the point that User:Francesco Betti Sorbelli is making is that that change should not be made on any of the four articles. --Falcadore (talk) 04:02, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did it just for convenience or you think that we need to delete Drivers and constructors, Race calendar table because it's duplication of results table? I think that you bring to the absurd. Cybervoron (talk) 11:48, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Drivers and Constructors? Well there is no constructor column, I assume you mean Team, but yes that is a far better idea to delete those two columns as well, than to include fastest lap and pole position in the calendar. Please inform me what the connection between a list of dates and the fastest lap is? Do so and I have no objection.

Absurd? How could it be? All that information is in the calednar table and the results table. Two tables with the same information is called duplication. Why is that absurd? --Falcadore (talk) 12:08, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I made tables like in Formula One seasons's articles... Cybervoron (talk) 10:30, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cybervoron, your infos are redundant! Please see the 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 seasons first. --Francesco Betti Sorbelli (talk) 17:39, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so. Please see the 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 2009 seasons first. If tables will be deleted from this articles, i swear that i would stop change the table in GP2's articles. Cybervoron (talk) 18:38, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, do these changes also in a 2009 seasons and see the consequences :D --Francesco Betti Sorbelli (talk) 20:20, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Over in the 2006 page I asked for a reason why this was a good idea. Consistently your justification is that this is who F1 does it. Do you have any kind of reason that is not based on 'someone else did it on a page of a different subject'? --Falcadore (talk) 21:34, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have already said that all this is done for convenience. And the fact that you and Francesco Betti Sorbelli don't need this information, it doesn't mean that it is not useful to others. I referred to the articles about Formula One seasons because it uses this table and it does not violate any rules. Therefore I see no reason why a similar table violates the rules here. Cybervoron (talk) 04:09, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Formula One article has large amounts of text to support the additional tables. This article does not. The effect here is stats overload, hence my mentioning of WP:NOTSTATS. It's not that I don't need the information, its duplication of information already presented elsewhere. --Falcadore (talk) 04:49, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And why are there race laps in the calendar table? That is not in the Formula One article. --Falcadore (talk) 04:53, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry i am not a graphomaniac, if you don't have enough text - write. I don't think that stats overload and violated by WP:NOTSTATS. Cybervoron (talk) 05:29, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because you've deleted them without discussion... Cybervoron (talk) 05:29, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There was a discussion. You apprarently missed it. --Falcadore (talk) 06:22, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Again I ask, why are there lap number in the schedule? Lap numbers are not relevant to the schedule. --Falcadore (talk) 04:23, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]